Muller v. Raskind
142 A. 918, 103 N.J. Eq. 20, 1928 N.J. LEXIS 630
Opinion
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Berry, and reported in 100 N. J. Eq. 258.
For affirmance — The ' Chief-Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Minturn, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, Lloyd, White, Van Buskirk, McGlennon, Kays, Hetfield, Dear, JJ. 15.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Muller v. Raskind, 142 A. 918, 103 N.J. Eq. 20, 1928 N.J. LEXIS 630 (N.J. 1928).
142 A. 918 (Muller v. Raskind) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Siesel v. Mandeville
55 A.2d 167 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1947)